The incident occurred during a hearing on competing applications concerning the two defendants: the prosecution sought their continued detention, while their lawyers requested bail. Tensions escalated after the prosecution outlined its objections to the defendants’ conduct and political statements. A defence lawyer reportedly protested loudly, leading to a heated exchange that quickly developed into a physical altercation.
During the scuffle, the shirt of Al Mohsin Touhid, a lawyer representing the defence, reportedly lost a button. The incident prompted the judge to withdraw to his private chamber at around 4.37pm. Prosecutor Omar Faruqui Faruqi and defence lawyer Monir Hossain subsequently intervened to calm those involved. The judge returned to the courtroom at 4.42pm and ordered the two defendants to be remanded in jail.
Four Arrested Over Tagore Portrait Incident
The case dates back to 10 October, when police arrested four people, including Ayas, the member-secretary of the State Dialogue Forum, over an incident involving the application of whitewash to a portrait of Rabindranath Tagore painted on a wall outside the Bangladesh Shilpakala Academy.
Police subsequently filed a case against the four individuals on allegations including criminal conspiracy, spreading hatred and hurting religious sentiments. The allegations remain subject to the legal process.
On the following day, the court authorised police remand for the four accused. Ayas and one other defendant were placed on three days’ remand each, while the remaining two were granted two days’ remand each.
After questioning Ayas and Marjia at the end of their remand period, the investigating officer, Sub-Inspector Abdul Gaffar Himel of Shahbagh Police Station, produced them before the CMM Court on Wednesday. He applied for their continued detention in jail, arguing that further investigation was necessary.
According to the investigating officer, questioning the defendants had yielded important information concerning other suspects who remained at large. Investigators were examining and verifying the information, he told the court. He argued that the two defendants should remain in custody until the investigation was completed and their names and addresses had been verified.
Defence Seeks Bail on Health and Family Grounds
Defence lawyer Monir Hossain challenged the allegations and the legal provisions under which the case had been filed. He argued that the accusations against his clients were unfounded and urged the court to consider their personal circumstances when deciding whether to grant bail.
Hossain told the court that Ayas was unwell and that Marjia had a child. He submitted that these circumstances should be taken into account when considering their applications for release.
The defence lawyer also argued that the defendants’ principal concern had been opposition to what they described as Indian aggression. According to his account, they had objected to the presence of images of Indian artists on the wall and intended to express support for artists from Bangladesh.
The prosecution disputed this characterisation of the incident and presented a sharply different interpretation of the defendants’ actions.
Prosecutor’s Remarks Trigger Heated Exchange
During the hearing, prosecutor Omar Faruqui Faruqi strongly criticised the defendants’ conduct. He questioned why Pakistan and Muhammad Ali Jinnah had been brought into the discussion and why Tagore’s portrait had been specifically targeted.
The prosecutor alleged that the act was intended to provoke members of the Hindu community and create instability. He also criticised what he described as repeated abusive language directed at the government and the public, arguing that such behaviour could have a negative influence on younger generations.
Faruqi further made comments about the political affiliations of those present in court, claiming that they were associated with Jamaat-e-Islami. These remarks formed part of the contentious exchange during the hearing.
An unidentified lawyer from the defence side reportedly objected loudly to the prosecution’s comments. The disagreement escalated within moments, with lawyers from the two sides becoming involved in a physical confrontation in front of the judge.
The scuffle disrupted the proceedings and forced the judge to leave the bench. The intervention by lawyers from both sides eventually restored sufficient order for the hearing to resume.
Detention Ordered After Courtroom Restored to Order
The judge returned to the courtroom at approximately 4.42pm, five minutes after leaving the bench, and ordered Ayas and Marjia to be sent to jail. The court did not grant their bail applications at the hearing.
The episode has drawn attention to the importance of maintaining professional conduct and order during judicial proceedings. Courtrooms provide a forum for opposing legal arguments, including disputes over political expression, alleged misconduct and the rights of defendants. Such disagreements are expected to be addressed through legal submissions and established judicial procedures.
In this case, the prosecution’s allegations, the defence’s objections and the arguments concerning the defendants’ personal circumstances were presented during the bail hearing. The investigation into the alleged defacement of Tagore’s portrait remains ongoing, with police seeking to verify information about other suspects.
The allegations against Ayas, Marjia and the other individuals have yet to be resolved through the judicial process. Their detention following Wednesday’s hearing does not, in itself, establish their guilt. The case will proceed through the relevant legal procedures, during which the allegations and evidence can be examined.
